DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is responsive to the amendments received after a Non-Final Rejection on 08 June 2026. Claims 1-30 are currently pending. Of these, claim 30 is withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Drawings
In view of the drawing amendments received on 08 June 2026, the drawings are accepted by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 8-10, 12, 14-16, 20 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Link (International Publication WO 2024/047127).
Regarding claims 1-5, 8-10, 12, 14-16 and 20, Link discloses (as to claim 1) a prosthetic system (see Figure 10) capable of providing motion between a first bone (i.e. tibia 99) and a second bone (i.e. femur 98) of a joint (i.e. a knee) of a subject, the first bone having a metaphyseal zone (i.e. not discussed, but inherent) and a diaphyseal zone (i.e. not discussed, but inherent), the system comprising a support structure (1, 1’, or 1’’) for use in implanting a component (see paragraph 0089) of an implant in the first bone of the subject, the support structure having a first end surface (i.e. top-most end surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a), a distal second end surface (i.e. bottom-most end surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a), an exterior surface (i.e. exterior surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, and an inner surface (i.e. surface defining 11 as best seen in Figure 13a) defining a passageway (11) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, the passageway tapering from the first end surface to the second end surface (i.e. due to cone shape, see Figures 13a-15b) wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in a cavity (i.e. canal) of the first bone such that the first end surface is flush with or beneath a surface of the first bone (positioning as best seen in Figure 10, see Note below regarding functional language), and wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in the cavity of the first bone such that a section of the exterior surface of the support structure contacts cortical bone in the diaphyseal zone of the first bone (e.g. due to a length and insertion depth of 1, see Figure 10 and Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 2) the component includes a body (93) and a stem (94) extending away from the body, and the stem is positioned within the passageway of the support structure (see paragraph 0089), wherein (as to claim 3) the first bone is a tibia (99), and the joint is a knee (see paragraph 0040), wherein (as to claim 4) the component comprises a tibial component (see paragraph 0089) having a body (93) and a stem (94) extending away from the body, wherein the stem is positioned within the passageway of the support structure (see paragraph 0089), wherein (as to claim 5) the body of the tibial component is a tibial tray (93), wherein (as to claim 8) the exterior surface of the support structure is roughened (i.e. due to pockets, see paragraph 0090), wherein (as to claim 9) the exterior surface of the support structure comprises a porous ingrowth material (29), wherein (as to claim 10) the support structure has a wall (2) between the exterior surface and the inner surface, and the wall includes a slot (i.e. slot defined adjacent first end surface of 1) extending away from the first end surface (extension as best seen in Figure 15a), wherein (as to claim 12) the support structure has a wall (2) between the exterior surface and the inner surface, and the wall includes a pair of slots (i.e. slot defined adjacent first end surface of 1) extending away from the first end surface (extension as best seen in Figure 15a), wherein (as to claim 14) the component includes a body (93) and a stem (94) extending away from the body, and the stem is positioned within the passageway of the support structure such that an end (i.e. free end of 94) of the stem opposite the body extends beyond the second end surface of the support structure (extension as best seen in Figure 10), wherein (as to claim 15) a portion of the exterior surface of the support structure has a frustoconical shape (see Figure 15a), wherein (as to claim 16) an entirety of the exterior surface of the support structure has a frustoconical shape (see Figure 15a), and wherein (as to claim 20) the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in the cavity of the first bone such that another section of the exterior surface of the support structure contacts cortical bone in the metaphyseal zone of the first bone (e.g. due to a length an insertion depth of 1, see Note below regarding functional language) (see Figures 10-15b, and paragraphs 0040 and 0089-0095).
Regarding claims 22-24, Link discloses (as to claim 22) a prosthetic system (see Figure 10) capable of providing motion between a first bone (i.e. tibia 99) and a second bone (i.e. femur 98) of a joint (i.e. a knee) of a subject, the first bone having a metaphyseal zone (i.e. not discussed, but inherent) and a diaphyseal zone (i.e. not discussed, but inherent), the system comprising a support structure (1, 1’, or 1’’) for use in implanting a component (see paragraph 0089) of an implant in the first bone of the subject, the support structure having a first end surface (i.e. top-most end surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a), a distal second end surface (i.e. bottom-most end surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a), an exterior surface (i.e. exterior surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, and an inner surface (i.e. surface defining 11 as best seen in Figure 13a) defining a passageway (11) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, the passageway tapering from the first end surface to the second end surface (i.e. due to cone shape, see Figures 13a-15b) wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in a cavity (i.e. canal) of the first bone such that the first end surface is flush with or beneath a surface of the first bone (positioning as best seen in Figure 10, see Note below regarding functional language), and wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in the cavity of the first bone such that a section of the exterior surface of the support structure contacts cortical bone in the diaphyseal zone of the first bone (e.g. due to a length and insertion depth of 1, see Figure 10 and Note below regarding functional language), and wherein the support structure has bilateral symmetry with respect to a longitudinal plane (i.e. plane defined along and through center of 11 as seen in the view in Figure 13a) containing a longitudinal axis (i.e. axis defined along and through center of 11 as seen in the view in Figure 13a) of the passageway (see paragraph 0030 referring to the support structure being capable of having an axis of symmetry), wherein (as to claim 23) a portion of the exterior surface of the support structure has a frustoconical shape (see Figure 15a), and wherein (as to claim 24) an entirety of the exterior surface of the support structure has a frustoconical shape (see Figure 15a) (see Figures 10-15b, and paragraphs 0030, 0040 and 0089-0095).
Note: Regarding functional language, "[a]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) (see MPEP 2114(II)).
Claims 1-2, 6-9 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lieberman et al. (U.S. Patent 10,543,097).
Lieberman et al. disclose (as to claim 1) a prosthetic system (see Figure 1) capable of providing motion between a first bone (i.e. a femur) and a second bone (i.e. a tibia) of a joint (i.e. a knee) of a subject, the first bone having a metaphyseal zone (see column 9, lines 48-50) and a diaphyseal zone (i.e. not discussed, but inherent), the system comprising a support structure (24) for use in implanting a component (22) of an implant in the first bone of the subject, the support structure having a first end surface (47A), a distal second end surface (26A, i.e. surface distal to a knee), an exterior surface (i.e. exterior surface of 24 as best seen in Figure 1) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, and an inner surface (i.e. surface defining 68 as best seen in Figure 1) defining a passageway (68) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, the passageway tapering from the first end surface to the second end surface (i.e. due to stepped tapering, see Figure 1) wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in a cavity (i.e. canal) of the first bone such that the first end surface is flush with or beneath a surface of the first bone (see Note above regarding functional language), and wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in the cavity of the first bone such that a section of the exterior surface of the support structure contacts cortical bone in the diaphyseal zone of the first bone (e.g. due to a length and insertion depth of 24, see Note above regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 2) the component includes a body (10) and a stem (22) extending away from the body, and the stem is positioned within the passageway of the support structure (see Figure 13), wherein (as to claim 6) the first bone is a femur (i.e. for receiving 22/24), and the joint is a knee (see column 8, lines 20-22), wherein (as to claim 7) the component comprises a femoral component (10) having medial and lateral condyles (12 and 14) with curved articulating surfaces (see Figure 1), wherein (as to claim 8) the exterior surface of the support structure is roughened (i.e. due to stepped shape, see Figure 1), wherein (as to claim 9) the exterior surface of the support structure comprises a porous ingrowth material (see column 10, lines 14-18), wherein (as to claim 14) the component includes a body (10) and a stem (22) extending away from the body, and the stem is positioned within the passageway of the support structure such that an end (i.e. free end of 22) of the stem opposite the body extends beyond the second end surface of the support structure (extension as best seen in Figure 13), wherein (as to claim 15) a portion of the exterior surface of the support structure has a frustoconical shape (see Figure 1), and wherein (as to claim 16) an entirety of the exterior surface of the support structure has a frustoconical shape (see Figure 1) (see Figures 1-14, and column 8, line 20 – column 14, line 48).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 11, 13, 17-19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Link (International Publication WO 2024/047127), as applied to claims 1, 10 and 12 above respectively, in view of Marlow (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0015212).
Link discloses wherein (as to part of claims 11 and 13) the component includes a body (93) and a stem (94) extending away from the body, and the stem is positioned within the passageway of the support structure (see paragraph 0089), and wherein (as to part of claim 21) the first end surface is within an axial plane defined by an outermost edge (i.e. top-most edge of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a) of the first end surface; however, fails to explicitly disclose wherein (as to the remainder of claim 11) a keel of the component is positioned within the slot, wherein (as to the remainder of claim 13) a first keel of the component is positioned within one of the pair of slots and a second keel of the component is positioned within another of the pair of slots, wherein (as to claim 17) a longitudinal length of the support structure from the first end surface to the second end surface is capable of being in a range of 65 millimeters to 105 millimeters, wherein (as to claim 18) a transverse length of an outside diameter at the first end surface of the support structure is capable of being in a range of 25 millimeters to 45 millimeters, wherein (as to claim 19) a transverse length of an outside diameter at the second end surface of the support structure is capable of being in a range of 15 millimeters to 27 millimeters, and wherein (as to the remainder of claim 21) a longitudinal axis of the passageway of the support structure is offset with respect to a geometric center point of the axial plane.
Marlow teaches the use of a prosthetic system (10) capable of providing motion between a first bone (i.e. a tibia or a femur) and a second bone (i.e. a femur or a tibia) of a joint (i.e. a knee) of a subject, the first bone having a metaphyseal zone (i.e. not shown, but inherent) and a diaphyseal zone (i.e. not shown, but inherent), the system comprising a support structure (18/318) for use in implanting a component (i.e. 14/16/20 or 12/20) of an implant in the first bone of the subject, the support structure having a first end surface (i.e. top-most end surface of 18 as best seen in Figure 5A), a distal second end surface (i.e. bottom-most end surface of 18 as best seen in Figure 5A), an exterior surface (34) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, and an inner surface (i.e. surface defining 30/32/38 as best seen in Figure 5C) defining a passageway (i.e. passageway defined by 30/32) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in a cavity (i.e. canal) of the first bone such that the first end surface is flush with or beneath a surface of the first bone (see Note above regarding functional language), and wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in the cavity of the first bone such that a section of the exterior surface of the support structure contacts cortical bone in the diaphyseal zone of the first bone (e.g. due to a length an insertion depth of 18, see Note above regarding functional language), wherein the support structure has a wall (i.e. wall defined between 32 and 34) between the exterior surface and the inner surface (see Figure 5C), and the wall includes a slot (i.e. slot defined by 40) extending away from the first end surface (extension as best seen in Figure 5A), wherein the component includes a body (14/16) and a stem (20) extending away from the body, and the stem is positioned within the passageway of the support structure such that a keel (i.e. keel defined by 24) of the component is positioned within the slot (see paragraph 0048), wherein the support structure has a wall (i.e. wall defined between 32 and 34) between the exterior surface and the inner surface, and the wall includes a pair of slots (i.e. slots defined by each instance of 40) extending away from the first end surface (extension as best seen in Figure 5A), wherein the component includes a body (14/16) and a stem (20) extending away from the body, and the stem is positioned within the passageway of the support structure such that a first keel (i.e. left-most keel defined by 24 as best seen in Figure 4) of the component is positioned within one of the pair of slots and a second keel (i.e. right-most keel defined by 24 as best seen in Figure 4) of the component is positioned within another of the pair of slots (see paragraph 0048), wherein a longitudinal length (L) of the support structure from the first end surface to the second end surface is capable of being in a range of 65 millimeters to 105 millimeters (see Figures 6A-6C, and paragraph 0058), wherein a transverse length (W) of an outside diameter at the first end surface of the support structure is capable of being in a range of 25 millimeters to 45 millimeters (see Figures 6A-6C, and paragraph 0058), wherein a transverse length (i.e. a length similar to W) of an outside diameter at the second end surface of the support structure is capable of being in a range of 15 millimeters to 27 millimeters (since W is capable of being in a range of 2 millimeters to 80 millimeters and the exterior surface of the support structures tapers, it is the examiner’s position that the transverse length at the second end surface is capable of falling within the range of 15 millimeters to 27 millimeters, see paragraph 0058), and wherein the first end surface (i.e. top-most end surface of 318 as best seen in Figure 10D) is within an axial plane defined by an outermost edge (i.e. top-most edge of 318 as best seen in Figure 5A) of the first end surface, and a longitudinal axis (i.e. axis defined along and through center of 330/332) of the passageway of the support structure is offset with respect to a geometric center point of the axial plane (see Figure 10D, and paragraphs 0068-0072) (see Figures 1-13, and paragraphs 0037-0085).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Link with wherein a keel of the component is positioned within the slot, wherein a first keel of the component is positioned within one of the pair of slots and a second keel of the component is positioned within another of the pair of slots, wherein a longitudinal length of the support structure from the first end surface to the second end surface is capable of being in a range of 65 millimeters to 105 millimeters, wherein a transverse length of an outside diameter at the first end surface of the support structure is capable of being in a range of 25 millimeters to 45 millimeters, wherein a transverse length of an outside diameter at the second end surface of the support structure is capable of being in a range of 15 millimeters to 27 millimeters, and wherein a longitudinal axis of the passageway of the support structure is offset with respect to a geometric center point of the axial plane in view of Marlow in order to provide well-known, obvious/conventional structures and dimensions for repairing a tibial portion of a knee joint to yield predictable results.
Claims 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Link (International Publication WO 2024/047127) in view of Marlow (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0015212).
Regarding claims 25-27, Link discloses (as to part of claim 25) a prosthetic system (see Figure 10) capable of providing motion between a first bone (i.e. tibia 99) and a second bone (i.e. femur 98) of a joint (i.e. a knee) of a subject, the first bone having a metaphyseal zone (i.e. not discussed, but inherent) and a diaphyseal zone (i.e. not discussed, but inherent), the system comprising a support structure (1, 1’, or 1’’) for use in implanting a component (see paragraph 0089) of an implant in the first bone of the subject, the support structure having a first end surface (i.e. top-most end surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a), a distal second end surface (i.e. bottom-most end surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a), an exterior surface (i.e. exterior surface of 1 as best seen in Figure 15a) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, and an inner surface (i.e. surface defining 11 as best seen in Figure 13a) defining a passageway (11) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, the passageway tapering from the first end surface to the second end surface (i.e. due to cone shape, see Figures 13a-15b) wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in a cavity (i.e. canal) of the first bone such that the first end surface is flush with or beneath a surface of the first bone (positioning as best seen in Figure 10, see Note above regarding functional language), and wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in the cavity of the first bone such that a section of the exterior surface of the support structure contacts cortical bone in the diaphyseal zone of the first bone (e.g. due to a length and insertion depth of 1, see Figure 10 and Note above regarding functional language), and wherein the support structure defines a longitudinal plane (i.e. plane defined along and through center of 11 as seen in the view in Figure 13a) containing a longitudinal axis (i.e. axis defined along and through center of 11 as seen in the view in Figure 13a) of the passageway, and wherein (as to part of claim 26) the support structure has a wall (2) between the exterior surface and the inner surface (see Figures 10-15b, and paragraphs 0030, 0040 and 0089-0095).
Link discloses that the support structure may define an axis of symmetry (i.e. which would indicate the capability of the support structure not being symmetrical, see paragraph 0030); however, fails to explicitly disclose wherein (as to the remainder of claim 25) the support structure does not have bilateral symmetry with respect to the longitudinal plane containing the longitudinal axis of the passageway, wherein (as to the remainder of claim 26) the wall includes opposed lobes that terminate at the first end surface of the support structure, and wherein (as to claim 27) one of the opposed lobes extends a first distance away from a longitudinal plane containing a longitudinal axis of the passageway, the other of the opposed lobes extends a second distance away from the longitudinal plane containing the longitudinal axis of the passageway, and the first distance is greater than the second distance.
Marlow teaches the use of a prosthetic system (10) capable of providing motion between a first bone (i.e. a tibia or a femur) and a second bone (i.e. a femur or a tibia) of a joint (i.e. a knee) of a subject, the first bone having a metaphyseal zone (i.e. not shown, but inherent) and a diaphyseal zone (i.e. not shown, but inherent), the system comprising a support structure (18/318) for use in implanting a component (i.e. 14/16/20 or 12/20) of an implant in the first bone of the subject, the support structure having a first end surface (i.e. top-most end surface of 18 as best seen in Figure 5A), a second end surface (i.e. bottom-most end surface of 18 as best seen in Figure 5A), an exterior surface (34) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, and an inner surface (i.e. surface defining 30/32/38 as best seen in Figure 5C) defining a passageway (i.e. passageway defined by 30/32) extending from the first end surface to the second end surface, wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in a cavity (i.e. canal) of the first bone such that the first end surface is flush with or beneath a surface of the first bone (see Note above regarding functional language), and wherein the exterior surface of the support structure is capable of being received in the cavity of the first bone such that a section of the exterior surface of the support structure contacts cortical bone in the diaphyseal zone of the first bone (e.g. due to a length an insertion depth of 18, see Note above regarding functional language), and wherein the support structure is capable of not having bilateral symmetry (i.e. capable of having asymmetry) with respect to a longitudinal plane (i.e. plane defined along and through center of 30/32) containing a longitudinal axis (i.e. axis defined along and through center of 30/32) of the passageway (see paragraph 0052), wherein the support structure (i.e. 318) has a wall (i.e. wall defined between 332 and 334) between the exterior surface (334) and the inner surface (i.e. surface defining 330/332/338 as best seen in Figure 10D), and the wall includes opposed lobes (see annotated Figure below) that terminate at the first end surface (i.e. top-most end surface of 318 as best seen in Figure 10C) of the support structure, and wherein one of the opposed lobes extends a first distance (see annotated Figure below) away from a longitudinal plane (i.e. plane defined along and through center of 330/332) containing a longitudinal axis (i.e. axis defined along and through center of 330/332) of the passageway, the other of the opposed lobes extends a second distance (see annotated Figure below) away from the longitudinal plane containing the longitudinal axis of the passageway, and the first distance is greater than the second distance (see annotated Figure below) (see annotated Figure below, Figures 1-13, and paragraphs 0037-0085).
PNG
media_image1.png
386
261
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Link with wherein the support structure does not have bilateral symmetry with respect to the longitudinal plane containing the longitudinal axis of the passageway, wherein the wall includes opposed lobes that terminate at the first end surface of the support structure, and wherein one of the opposed lobes extends a first distance away from a longitudinal plane containing a longitudinal axis of the passageway, the other of the opposed lobes extends a second distance away from the longitudinal plane containing the longitudinal axis of the passageway, and the first distance is greater than the second distance in view of Marlow in order to provide well-known, obvious/conventional shapes, structures and dimensions for repairing a tibial portion of a knee joint to yield predictable results.
Regarding claims 28 and 29, Link in view of Marlow disclose the claimed invention except for wherein (as to claim 28) the first distance is in a range of 22 millimeters to 40 millimeters, and wherein (as to claim 29) the second distance is in a range of 18 millimeters to 35 millimeters.
Marlow sets forth that the location of the passageway (i.e. 330, where the location of 330 would alter the range of the interpreted first and second distances) is a result effective variable, wherein the location of the passageway is dependent upon the subject’s anatomy and an optimal fit of the component of the implant in the first bone (see paragraph 0052).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Link in view of Marlow with wherein the first distance is in a range of 22 millimeters to 40 millimeters, and wherein the second distance is in a range of 18 millimeters to 35 millimeters, for the purpose of accounting for the subject’s anatomy and providing an optimal fit of the component of the implant in the first bone, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233). Furthermore, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-29 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY E WAGGLE, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-7110. The examiner can normally be reached TEAP: Monday - Friday (7:45am - 3:45pm).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Truong can be reached at 571-272-4705. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LARRY E WAGGLE, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights